Adventist: amalgamation in CERTAIN races of men.

[fhansen]

The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood.

I think Ellen was the confused one here.

 

[NBB]

The important part of man is the soul and spirit, and God values the heart of man not the body, another 'mistake' by ellen white.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Amalgamation: Ellen G. White Statements Regarding Conditions at the Time of the Flood

There is no mistake or another mistake by egw. the mistake is in the interpretations of the quotes taken from context like some people do with the scriptures trying to put an interpretation on them they are not saying. I was thinking to go through this one but found someone already beat me to it and wrote an article looking at the full context that is linked above for anyone that might be interested in the truth and context left out by the OP here.

........................

SUMMARY: The summary of the article being firstly in the amalgamation of the races were in context and reference to intermarriages of the races from the sons of God to the sons of men (heathen) which led the sons of God back into Idolatry. The chapter context was to the two great races from the descendants of Seth and the descendants of Cain. Secondly, the interbreeding of the animal species. The quotes are not referring to man with beast but beast with beast making confused animal species. Anyone that knows anything about the classification systems of animals knows that something that would be progeny of two different animal orders cannot be a species it would be a whole new classification. Note also, both passages do not say Amalgamation of man with beast but Amalgamation of man and beast. The meaning here is that amalgamation of the races through intermarriage and the amalgamation of beast with beast making confused species of animals. BOOM! and the whole OP falls over. I think this will be my last post here as I am not really into these type of threads as I only see them as a distraction for those not wanting to discuss the scriptures.

Hope this is helpful for anyone interested.

 

[tall73]

The summary of the article being firstly in the amalgamation of the races were in context and reference to intermarriages of the races from the sons of God to the sons of men (heathen) which led the sons of God back into Idolatry.

Doesn't explain it. After the flood she says she sees amalgamation in certain races (plural) of men.

Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men

Here your explanation list only two groups, the heathen and those following God. However, Seth and Cain were brothers, not different races.

But more than that you have Ellen White long after Seth and Cain, and the flood, saying that certain races show amalgamation.

So which races in your view did she think were tainted by heathenism?

And which races were free of heathenism?

Do you usually associate belief in God with races?

How could she "see" the amalgamation in "certain" races?

BOOM! and the whole OP falls over.

Boom alright. You just had Ellen White saying some races in her day were heathen and other races were not.

I think this will be my last post here as I am not really into these type of threads as I only see them as a distraction for those not wanting to discuss the scriptures.

Well it might be for the best. But if you change your mind then tell us which races you see as heathen and which you see as godly in Ellen White's day.


Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men

 

[tall73]

God values the heart of man not the body.

Amen.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Doesn't explain it. After the flood she says she sees amalgamation in certain races (plural) of men. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men. Here your explanation list only two groups, the heathen and those following God. However, Seth and Cain were brothers, not different races.
But more than that you have Ellen White long after Seth and Cain, and the flood, saying that certain races show amalgamation. So which races in your view did she think were tainted by heathenism?
And which races were free of heathenism? Do you usually associate belief in God with races?
How could she "see" the amalgamation in "certain" races? Boom alright. You just had Ellen White saying some races in her day were heathen and other races were not. Well it might be for the best. But if you change your mind then tell us which races you see as heathen and which you see as godly in Ellen White's day. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men

Sure it explains it. Why would you think that intermarriage does not bring amalgamation of races? The context being to the sons of Seth (God's people) and those of Cain (not God's people). Is two plural or singular? After the flood the same thing has continued with intermarriage continuing between those who believe and follow God and those who do not believe and follow God in mankind's descendants from Noah leading God's people into idolatry. So two classes of believers and unbelievers still continued after the flood to this present day, as shown in the first post. Believers and unbelievers and intermarriage between them was forbidden by God not to mention the rise of polygamy. After the flood of course we have the separation of the people into other races and nations separated then by location because of language barriers after God's judgement due to the building of the tower of Babel unlike before the floods. So more races within races. Post-flood we not only see a continuation of intermarriage between the people of God and unbelievers but now intermarriages between races of different cultures, regions and languages. Not very hard not is it?

...............

You may also want to look at how the term "race" was used in that period of time. It was not used as we know it today.

Wikipedia - Race

A race is a grouping of humans based on shared physical or social qualities into categories generally viewed as distinct by society.[1] The term was first used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations. By the 17th century the term began to refer to physical (phenotypical) traits. Modern science regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by society.[2] While partially based on physical similarities within groups, race does not have an inherent physical or biological meaning.[1][3][4]

Social conceptions and groupings of races have varied over time, often involving folk taxonomies that define essential types of individuals based on perceived traits.[5] Today, scientists consider such biological essentialism obsolete,[6] and generally discourage racial explanations for collective differentiation in both physical and behavioral traits.[7][8][9][10][11]

Even though there is a broad scientific agreement that essentialist and typological conceptions of race are untenable,[12][13][14][15][16][17] scientists around the world continue to conceptualize race in widely differing ways.[18] While some researchers continue to use the concept of race to make distinctions among fuzzy sets of traits or observable differences in behavior, others in the scientific community suggest that the idea of race is inherently naive[7] or simplistic.[19] Still others argue that, among humans, race has no taxonomic significance because all living humans belong to the same subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens.[20][21]

Since the second half of the 20th century, the association of race with the discredited theories of scientific racism has contributed to race becoming increasingly seen as a largely pseudoscientific system of classification. Although still used in general contexts, race has often been replaced by less ambiguous and loaded terms: populations, people(s), ethnic groups, or communities, depending on context.[22][23]

.................

So as shown above her application to "the races" pre-flood and post-flood was quite consistent to the understanding and the application of the word "race" used in her day

PRE-FLOOD APPLICATION TO RACE; national affiliations (believers and unbelievers; Sons of God and the Sons of Cain); observable differences in behavior

POST FLOOD APPLICATION TO RACE; populations of people' communities; Ethnic groups; common languages and physical traits.

................

It is pretty easy to see the applications here in the quote you provided in regards to intermarriage and the races with application to believers and unbelievers in all nations of the world leading God's people back into idolatry. It is all through the bible. Sorry dear friend but we will have to agree to disagree. For me when the context is added back into your OP it is not saying what you are claiming it does.

So that will do it for me. I will leave you to your discussion

Your welcome.

 

[ripple the car]

This is the problem with revivalist / restorationist “prophets”, “prophetesses” and “seers”. Many, many of them tended to have unfortunately racist views.

Joseph Smith. Ellen G. White. Herbert Armstrong.

Just unyoke yourselves from these people. You’d be better off just sitting quietly at home with a Bible, praying, and keeping your faith simple. Minus these guys.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

This is the problem with revivalist / restorationist “prophets”, “prophetesses” and “seers”. Many, many of them tended to have unfortunately racist views.

Joseph Smith. Ellen G. White. Herbert Armstrong.

Just unyoke yourselves from these people. You’d be better off just sitting quietly at home with a Bible, praying, and keeping your faith simple. Minus these guys.

Post me a racist comment by EGW? If you can't why are you claiming she is racist? I am sitting at home with two bibles and some digital ones but no one wants to discuss the scriptures with me.

 

[ripple the car]

.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

The irony is that Ellen G. White, honestly, looks as thought she could have had mixed ancestry herself. It’s possible.

If she did, yet grew up believing herself to be fully White, or knowing her ancestry yet choosing to pass as White, her statements still make sense in the context of racial theories of her time, but not in the context of Scriptural or historical Truth.

I am still waiting for you to prove what your saying here. Anna, I think you have the topic of discussion mixed up. No one is saying that EGW is racist. Perhaps you might need to follow the discussion through as we are not discussing racism. Although for me I am much more interested in what the bible says. So I will not be hanging around here.

 

[Freth]

....

So was the corruption due to sin generally or worldliness? Were not the wicked also not far removed from Eden?

Cain and Abel are a perfect example of Godly men and wicked men, but you knew that already. Feigning ignorance.

Were you proposing giants in Ellen White's day? Because she indicated it was seen in certain races.

You know I meant preflood. Again, feigning ignorance.

Also, can you explain what you mean by races? Why would worldliness be associated with race?

Leading the witness and again, feigning ignorance. It was Ellen that specified races. We are discussing the limited scope of her mere paragraphs about amalgamation. I posted what she said, with context.

No, I am just asking why you think certain races showed these effects, and asking if you know which ones. You make it sound like a mystery, but she said it was visible, could be seen. So what are the markers?

Again, I told you, Ellen didn't name races, neither can I. I mentioned giants, men of renown, what else does scripture say? That's a rhetorical question.

So you see the Spirit of God as associated with races? Some have it, and some don't? Some races sin and are corrupt, and others are not?

Did you read my post or did you completely ignore it?

Genesis 6:3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.​

The Spirit of God (the Holy Spirit) lingered with men, but began to wane because of the corruption of Satan; because of the disconnect from God due to sin. The Holy Spirit is a key aspect that distinguishes people of God from people of the world—spiritual. But you knew that. Again, leading the witness and feigning ignorance.

And this is where I decided to put a stop to this line of questioning.

Twisting my words into new questions that lead to your foregone conclusions is not a discussion, it's a bait and switch. How this? How that? When you know the answers already. I explained each point in detail, there should be no question what my point of view is.

Allow me to quote everything I said about race, so there's no confusion here.

• As to who the corrupt races of men are, I think all races are inherently corrupted to some degree at this late stage of the end time (as per the days of Noah). We don't have giants in this day and age, but the corruption is everywhere to be seen.
• I mentioned the giants. If it's not in the Bible, I can't tell you what other races or creatures there were.
• You're asking me to put words in Ellen's mouth by naming races she herself didn't name anywhere in her writings. I don't think you can say Uriah Smith quoted Ellen when he named names.
• ...and why do you think those races were more likely to be worldly? Satanic corruption, as was stated.
• How did some races manage not to be worldly? The Spirit of God, as was stated.

I included your quotes in italics in the last two bullet points for reference.​

Ellen said what she said. I quoted context in my first post. You can think what you want about what she said. Uriah Smith said what he said. You can think what you want to think about what he said.

You have a good day and God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

Amalgamation: Ellen G. White Statements Regarding Conditions at the Time of the Flood

SUMMARY: The summary of the article being firstly in the amalgamation of the races were in context and reference to intermarriages of the races from the sons of God to the sons of men (heathen) which led the sons of God back into Idolatry. The chapter context was to the two great races from the descendants of Seth and the descendants of Cain. Secondly, the interbreeding of the animal species. The quotes are not referring to man with beast but beast with beast making confused animal species. Anyone that knows anything about the classification systems of animals knows that something that would be progeny of two different animal orders cannot be a species it would be a whole new classification. Note also, both passages do not say Amalgamation of man with beast but Amalgamation of man and beast. The meaning here is that amalgamation of the races through intermarriage and the amalgamation of beast with beast making confused species of animals. ..

Indeed that summarizes it well. Ellen White's statement had nothing to do with amalgamation of man with beast. It had to do with mixing non-Christian with Christian as we see in Genesis 6 - that resulted in the extinction of pre-flood Christianity and then the flood.

(And obviously - all races of mankind come from one single family ... Noah. (and before that Adam))

Interesting detail - is that Earth now has amalgamation of man WITH beast (in two forms) and it does not produce new races of mankind - but rather different human-animal species.

Human-animal Chimera
Human-Animal Chimeras: Biological Research & Ethical Issues | Live Science
Human-animal chimeras
Human-animal chimeras are a further example of an interspecies chimera, generated when human cells are introduced into animals. This can be done through a variety of techniques. Human cells and tissues can be grafted into embryos, fetuses or adult vertebrate animals, Behringer said. Human-animal chimeras are also produced by introducing human stem cells into animals during various developmental stages, be it embryonic, fetal or postnatal (after birth), according to a 2007 article, also published in the journal Cell Stem Cell.

from:First monkey–human embryos reignite debate over hybrid animals
"Scientists have successfully grown monkey embryos containing human cells for the first time — the latest milestone in a rapidly advancing field that has drawn ethical questions.

"In the work, published on 15 April in Cell1, the team injected monkey embryos with human stem cells and watched them develop. They observed human and monkey cells divide and grow together in a dish, with at least 3 embryos surviving to 19 days after fertilization. “The overall message is that every embryo contained human cells that proliferate and differentiate to a different extent,” says Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, a developmental biologist at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, and one of the researchers who led the work.

Tiny Human Brains Inside Rats Are Sparking Ethical Concern.

==================== the second form is human-animal hybridization

These look like chimeras at one level so not sure if they are using he term hybrid correctly.

And also human-animal hybridization
‘Human Monkey’ Hybrid Created for Research Reignites Debate on Cross-species Animals

"Scientists associated with the Salk Institute in San Diego, California have injected primate embryos with human stem cells to create a new hybrid that continued to grow for up to 20 days but the scientific community is questioning the ethics of the moral status of the ‘monkey-human’ hybrid created by the scientists in the US and China, these embryos are to be used to help with knowledge on developmental biology and evolution and help in research for cancer treatments.

"The idea behind creating the hybrids was that humans cannot be used for all experiments and so a nearly human creature can help solve the problem, said lead author Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte."

========================

The Genesis 6 context that Ellen White used - results deforms the image of God via loss of the true faith and no longer reflecting God's character.

The human-with-animal idea that Uriah Smith supposed - as noted above creates new human-animal species not races of men.


Japan drops ban on human-animal hybrids, lab production greenlit
============================

Now Bob, you changed a few things.

Were they different races? I thought they were brothers.

All races of man come from the exact same family of Noah -- which came from the single family of Adam and the children in both cases were "brothers".

I think we all knew that right?

Now in the case of Ellen White she saw this amalgamation reflected in certain races of men.

And she explained this in the case of Genesis 6 with image of God being erased from the descendants of Cain - vs Seth where they held to the true faith but were compromised by mixing the two until the world was destroyed.

Different races is very different from different species.

That is plural. And this is after the flood. So it can't simply be Seth and Cain.

Agreed - after the flood the one single family of Noah results in all races of mankind. And some have experienced 1000's of years of no connection with Christian faith at all.

========== context for terms used in the 1800's and 1900's ======

Race: "A race is a grouping of humans based on shared physical or social qualities into categories generally viewed as distinct by society. The term was first used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations. By the 17th century the term began to refer to physical (phenotypical) traits."

 

[Danthemailman]

This is the problem with revivalist / restorationist “prophets”, “prophetesses” and “seers”. Many, many of them tended to have unfortunately racist views.

Joseph Smith. Ellen G. White. Herbert Armstrong.

Just unyoke yourselves from these people. You’d be better off just sitting quietly at home with a Bible, praying, and keeping your faith simple. Minus these guys.

There are quotes from Ellen G White from the link below which may interest you.

Ellen White Supremacist

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Deleted

 

[Freth]

There are quotes from Ellen G White from the link below which may interest you.

Ellen White Supremacist

This might be a violation of this forum's rule.

• Do not identify a group of members or a theological viewpoint with a derogatory or inflammatory label.

 

[Danthemailman]

This might be a violation of this forum's rule, I'm not sure.

• Do not identify a group of members or a theological viewpoint with a derogatory or inflammatory label.

I typed in the link to the article and that's what came up. I am simply pointing out quotes from Ellen G White which sound racist to anna - grace who mentioned in post #47 - This is the problem with revivalist / restorationist “prophets”, “prophetesses” and “seers”. Many, many of them tended to have unfortunately racist views and included Ellen G White in a list of three names.

 

[Freth]

There are quotes from Ellen G White from the link below which may interest you.

Ellen White Supremacist

The first quote on the linked page.

"In heaven there will be no color line; for all will be as white as Christ himself. Let us thank God that we can be members of the royal family."​

The full quote from The Gospel Herald.

“The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, Whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance.” You are the children of God. He has adopted you, and He desires you to form characters here that will give you entrance into the heavenly family. Remembering this, you will be able to bear the trials which you meet here. In heaven there will be no color line; for all will be as white as Christ himself. Let us thank God that we can be members of the royal family. { GH March 1, 1901, par. 20 }​

Exactly what is the color line?

Wikipedia:

The term color line was originally used as a reference to the racial segregation that existed in the United States after the abolition of slavery.​

Exactly what is meant by the term "white"? Purity, righteousness, holiness—character worthy of heaven (as per above). Ellen is clearly saying there will be no racial segregation, we will all be as white as snow and of one royal family.

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Matthew 28:3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow.

Mark 9:3 And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth can white them.

Revelation 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire.​

The very first point made on the web page is clearly taken out of context, because it doesn't show the full quote. And this is par for the course. Each point on that page can be refuted in the same manner.

You can read more of what Ellen wrote about the color line in Testimonies for the Church, vol. 9, 213.1 thru 216.3

 

[ripple the car]

There are quotes from Ellen G White from the link below which may interest you.

Ellen White Supremacist

Thanks, Dan!

 

[tall73]

Indeed that summarizes it well. Ellen White's statement had nothing to do with amalgamation of man with beast. It had to do with mixing non-Christian with Christian as we see in Genesis 6 - that resulted in the extinction of pre-flood Christianity and then the flood.

Bob, you have been so keen on not agreeing with Uriah Smith that you may not realize what you have managed to do here.

I agree Uriah Smith's explanation does not hold up. As an animal/human hybrid, chimera would not be fully human.

Interesting detail - is that Earth now has amalgamation of man WITH beast (in two forms) and it does not produce new races of mankind - but rather different human-animal species.

And I saw the same article last night, and it is unfortunately only one in a long line of horribly unethical experiments. I even highlighted such on a website I ran at one point before these stories were in the mainstream news regularly. And I would agree THAT is a base crime, and a terrible sin.

And I understand you are not saying that is what is happening in this quote. So let's agree, the English of the sentence could be read man with man and beast with beast.

And you will note, I allowed Adventists to give their own interpretation. I am aware of at least three Adventist explanations of this text. I did not dictate that you must accept Uriah Smith's view.

But now you have the very strange sight of multiple Adventist posters triumphing that they have proved it is not a mix of human and animal. However, the rest of the onlookers are amazed that multiple Adventist posters have tied physical characteristics of race to the question of loyalty to God.

She said it is seen in certain races of men--in her day. She is saying that some races have the characteristic of this "base crime".

(And obviously - all races of mankind come from one single family ... Noah. (and before that Adam))

Agreed. And all are human, which I assume you agree with. And while various nations may have trends in behavior, including idolatry, which they are judged on, that is different than associating race, or groups of shared physical characteristics with "the base crime of amalgamation."

Edom and Israel are said to be brothers, and they were likely not radically different in physical characteristics. Each of them as a nation was given time in the land, as even the Ammorites before them were until they filled up their full measure of wrath. All of these nations certainly went through times of idolatry, Israel included.

She says this base crime of amalgamation "defaced the image of God". And she is also saying that post-flood you can "see" this in "certain races" of men, parallel to seeing mixing of animals.

So if we take your definition that the "base crime of amalgamation" is when holy and unholy people intermarry, you have now established in your claim groups of people who share physical characteristics which are visible who you associate with idol worship, turning from the Lord, etc. And you have also by implication established races, people who share physical characteristics, who have not turned away from the Lord.

You literally have multiple Adventist posters in this thread arguing for defiled and pure "races", with visible characteristics that can be "seen".

So you have avoided saying human was mixed with animal only by saying some groups of human traits are associated with a defaced image of God, and a base crime.

The Genesis 6 context that Ellen White used - results deforms the image of God via loss of the true faith and no longer reflecting God's character.

The human-with-animal idea that Uriah Smith supposed - as noted above creates new human-animal species not races of men.

Well when applied to her second quote the principle you give above winds up with you classifying pure and defiled races that she can see in her day. That is not a solution I would think was good.

All races of man come from the exact same family of Noah -- which came from the single family of Adam and the children in both cases were "brothers".

I think we all knew that right?

Indeed we do. See above.

And she explained this in the case of Genesis 6 with image of God being erased from the descendants of Cain - vs Seth where they held to the true faith but were compromised by mixing the two until the world was destroyed.

Different races is very different from different species.

Yes Bob, it is. However, you do realize you are saying that race mixing through marriage is destroying the world, right?

It was not race that was the problem, even in your own logic. Cain and company in your view turned from the Lord quickly enough that they are a distinct group. But they would not be a distinct "race" of physical characteristics immediately. They were a group who shared cultural and moral characteristics. You could say they formed nations. And God certainly judges nations, as well as individuals.

But now you are saying mixing of races is a base crime, and Ellen White is saying, and you are claiming to agree with her, that the evidence of this base crime (which you define as godlessness) can be seen in "certain" races of men in her day, just as mixture of animals can be "seen".

You may need to go back to the drawing board on this one.

Agreed - after the flood the one single family of Noah results in all races of mankind. And some have experienced 1000's of years of no connection with Christian faith at all.

And the other "races" have been pure? You think following God is a function of physical characteristics? What race is pure in following God?

Bob, everyone is sinful. Some people, some families follow the Lord. Even some nations follow the Lord at some points in their experience. But God judges nations on where they go over time. He gives them time before they fill up their measure of wrath. Israel also was filled with idolatry in a number of points in their history.

========== context for terms used in the 1800's and 1900's ======

Race: "A race is a grouping of humans based on shared physical or social qualities into categories generally viewed as distinct by society. The term was first used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations. By the 17th century the term began to refer to physical (phenotypical) traits."

So you have now defended Ellen White by saying in her time she saw "certain" phenoytypes as godless.

Are you sure that is what you want people to know?

 

[tall73]

Post-flood we not only see a continuation of intermarriage between the people of God and unbelievers but now intermarriages between races of different cultures, regions and languages. Not very hard not is it?

Well let's see if it is hard by plugging in your explanation.

But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man
which defaced the image of God,

Now I am asking questions to make sure I understand. You are stating that the base crime of amalgamation was intermixing of groups, believers and non-believers, pre-flood through intermarriage, correct?

And this led some of the people of God to idolatry.

So let's see where we agree. I agree that God forbade someone to marry someone else who did not worship God. And I agree that in the case of Israel this often meant not taking foreign wives, etc. with the rationale that they did not worship the Lord.

In the New Testament context Paul talked about a widow could remarry, but in the Lord, etc.

However, if a person from another race did worship the Lord, then there is certainly no "base crime" in mixing of races. And we see foreigners joining themselves to God. And that is the point. Races are not monolithic. They are just shared characteristics. Races can and do contain people who worship the Lord and people who do not.

So if someone from the line of Cain worshiped the Lord in the time of Seth would it be wrong to marry that person?

In other words, it is not the mixing of races that is the issue, but the mixing of belief and unbelief. Race is brought into this without warrant.

Now discussing her second quote:

Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men. {3SG 75.2}

So you note after the flood:

LGW: Post-flood we not only see a continuation of intermarriage between the people of God and unbelievers but now intermarriages between races of different cultures, regions and languages. Not very hard not is it?

Yes, it is hard to see how mixing of races is a base crime. Humans are humans, and God made them all and sent His Son to die for them all, and does not want any to perish, but to repent. All have sinned.

There has never been a "race" that did not have godless people. And even Israel at times was filled with idolatry.

There were always true Israel, and false Israel. It was not racial, it was spiritual. And Israel was not picked for its righteousness to start with. Hence, John the Baptist said do not think to say that we have Abraham as our father....It was not race that mattered.

So when she says that there are "certain races" that we can "see" this in, that is hard.

And it is hard to see exactly who these "certain races" were in Ellen White's time who we can "see" evidence of this base crime of amalgamation.

Which races in her day do you think she meant? Uriah Smith listed some. In Ellen White's day we know how they classified race. And Uriah Smith's comments are a good example.

But why would you associate following God with race? Why would you say in some races in Ellen White's time we have the defacing of the image of God that can be seen?

And would you say in Ellen White's race that we did not see that? Was it really her race that was the issue?

Are you going to argue for pure and impure races? Are you saying any marriage between races is wrong?